Department for Work and Pensions Equality Information 2011

Report under the Public Sector Equality Duty List of tables.................................................................................................................................3 Introduction......................................................................................................................................5 Section 1: Information about our policies and services.................................................................11 Data sources and availability........................................................................................................11 Employment related impact indicators.........................................................................................14 1. Rates of people moving from out of work benefits into employment..............................14 2. Numbers on key out of work benefits..................................................................................15 3. Proportion of children living in workless households.........................................................20 4. Young people not in employment or full time education....................................................22 5. Gap between the employment rates for disabled people and the overall population........24 6. Average age people stop working.......................................................................................26 Poverty and social mobility related impact indicators.................................................................28 7. Rate of disability poverty......................................................................................................28 8. Rate of pensioner poverty.....................................................................................................31 9. Social mobility in adulthood..................................................................................................33 Pensions related impact indicators.............................................................................................34 10. Number of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer.........................34 Operational working of the Department related impact indicators ..............................................36 11. Monetary value of fraud and error in the benefit system....................................................36 12. Public opinion of DWP service levels..................................................................................37 13. Additional customer data.....................................................................................................42 Section 2: Information about our employees..................................................................................44 14. The DWP workforce................................................................................................................44 15. Disciplinary procedures..........................................................................................................49 16. Exits.........................................................................................................................................51 17. Working patterns.....................................................................................................................54 18. Grievances...............................................................................................................................56 19. Performance markings............................................................................................................58 20. Promotion.................................................................................................................................61 21. Recruitment process................................................................................................................62 22. Pay gap.....................................................................................................................................63 23. Training data............................................................................................................................67 24. Maternity data..........................................................................................................................68 25. Additional employee data........................................................................................................69 List of tables

Employment Table 2.1-2.3: Number of people on key out of work benefits by age, ethnicity and gender. Table 3.1-3.3: Proportion (percent) of children in each economic activity status of household category by age, gender, and ethnic origin of child. Table 4.1-4.3: Proportion of young people not in full time education who are workless by disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 5.1-5.4: Gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population by age, ethnicity, gender and religion. Table 6.1-6.4: Average age of withdrawal from the labour market by disability and gender, ethnicity and gender, gender overall and by gender and religion or belief.

Poverty and social mobility Table 7.1-7.4: Poverty rate for families by presence of disabled members and age, disabled members overall, disabled members and ethnicity, 2007/08-2009/10 and disabled members and gender. Table 8.1-8.4: Poverty rate for pensioners by age, disability, ethnic group of head of household and gender.

Pensions Table 10.1-2: Numbers of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer by age and gender.

Operational working of the Department Table 12.1-12.8: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with Jobcentre Plus and the Pension, Disability and Carers Service by age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Additional customer data Table 13.1: Percentage of employment gaps for various protected characteristics.

DWP workforce data Table 14.1-14.4: Percentage of DWP workforce by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 15.1-15.4: Percentage of employees disciplined by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 16.1-16.4: Percentage of reason for leaving by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 17.1-17.4: Percentage of employees with a part time working pattern by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 18.1-18.4: Percentage of employees raising a grievance by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 19.1-19.4: Percentage of performance ratings by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 20.1-20.4: Percentage of employees promoted by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 21.1-21.4: Percentage of recruitment process at different stages by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 22.1-22.4: Pay gap by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 23.1-23.4: Percentage of training applications by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Table 24.1-24.3: Percentage of employees returning from maternity leave by age, disability and ethnicity. Introduction

Under the Public Sector Equality Duty, part of the Equality Act 2010, as a public body the Department for Work and Pensions has a specific duty to publish relevant proportionate information to demonstrate our compliance with the legislation.

This means that we have to publish information to show that we have paid due regard to the three aims of the Equality Duty:

- eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Act;
- advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it; and
- foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.

The protected characteristics covered by the Equality Duty are:

- age;
- disability;
- gender reassignment;
- pregnancy and maternity;
- race - this includes ethnic or national origins, colour or nationality;
- religion or belief - this includes lack of belief;
- sex;
- sexual orientation; and
- marriage and civil partnership - in respect of eliminating unlawful discrimination only.

We must publish:

- information relating to people who are affected by our policies and practices who share protected characteristics, for example, our service users; and
- information relating to our employees who share protected characteristics.

Our overall approach

The report is divided into two sections:

Section One shows information and data relating to our policies, practices and service users; and

Section Two shows information and data relating to our employees. Transparency is a key operating principle for the Department, we want the information we provide to be easy to understand and use. To help with this, where possible and relevant, for each piece of data we have provided:

- a table of data;
- a brief explanation of what this tells us and how an improvement will be shown; and
- links to other information that you may find useful.

In future, we intend to embed equality information into our annual Departmental report which is usually published in July. Given this, where possible, we have used data that were available in July 2011. This means that some of the data sets do not cover the same period. However, when we next publish in July 2012, we will use the same data sets 12 months on, to allow annual comparisons to be made.

The Government is developing a cross-government Disability Strategy, with the aim that this will be published in Spring 2012. We will use this to inform both the disability equality information that we publish in future, and the description of our disability equality objectives under the Equality Duty. Discussions on the Strategy are on-going and more information can be found online.

**Our approach to providing information about our policies, practices and services**

In section one we have used the existing Departmental Impact Indicators included in our Business Plan. They show key data which are designed to help the public judge whether our policies are having the effect they want. We have broken the impact indicator data down by as many protected characteristics as we currently have available. Where data are not available we have explained how we plan to fill the gap in the future where this is possible and as relevant.

The information is grouped under four main areas which reflect our responsibilities:

- employment;
- poverty and social mobility;
- pensions; and
- the operational working of the Department.

It is important to note that the service user data sets used within section one come from a variety of different sources. Given this, the periods they cover and the frequency by which they are collected and analysed are not all the same. To help understanding we have explained specific details about the data sources and their availability in a table at the beginning of the section. Our approach to providing information relating to our employees

The Department is committed to equality and valuing diversity. We aim to build a workforce which reflects the society we serve and promote a working environment that is free from discrimination, bullying and harassment. We monitor the effectiveness of our policies and processes in relation to these principles primarily by analysing information collected by our internal human resource recording system called Resource Management (RM).

We encourage our employees to voluntarily and confidentially provide their information on RM in relation to sexual orientation, gender, disability and ethnicity. We are also currently putting processes in place to include religion or belief as a category. Following Cabinet Office consultation with the Government Equalities Office and a:gender (a support network for staff in Government Departments) we do not currently plan to include questions on gender identity. However, we do use other methods, such as consulting with staff network groups and we are active participants in the a:gender Trans Equality Index, that allows us to monitor our progress on transgender equality.

Unfortunately, at this time indication rates in relation to sexual orientation are too low for this information to be included. We are planning a communications campaign to encourage employees to make a declaration. At 31 March 2011 the indication rate for ethnicity was 76% and 82.5% for disability.

The ethnicity and disability indication rates are calculated from the number of people who have chosen to indicate their status, as this is the method recommended by the Office of National Statistics (ONS).

In section two we have used data from RM and other administrative systems to display information about:

- the make up of our workforce;
- discipline;
- exits;
- working patterns;
- grievances;
- performance management;
- recruitment and promotion;
- gender pay gap;
- training; and
- maternity leave.

Our approach to benchmarking as an employer

The Department participates in a number of external benchmarking exercises that compare our performance with other public sector organisations. For example, Stonewall’s Top 100 Workplace Equality Index where in 2012, we came 27th, which is a significant increase on our previous year’s result of 80th. We have also received recognition from a number of external bodies that highlight our best practice as an employer. For example, the Civil Service Fast Stream is ranked in the top ten Times Top 100 Graduate Employers. The Fast Stream Summer Diversity Internship Programme also won the ‘Best Diversity in Work Experience’ award as part of the National Placement and Internship Awards 2012.

Our approach to engaging with our employees

The Department understands the importance of engaging our employees and the benefits that having an engaged workforce brings for both the organisation and for the individual. We use a wide range of engagement tools and techniques for example, every month employees are offered the opportunity to talk to our Permanent Secretary Robert Devereux in a conference call known as ‘Robert’s question time’. They are encouraged to ask questions, raise issues and offer up ideas or suggestions.

We also operate a ‘back to the floor’ scheme where senior leaders spend time working in a service delivery office. This gives employees an opportunity to work alongside the people that make and influence business decisions. It also gives our senior leaders valuable insight into the operation of our front line services. Since 2007, over 300 senior figures have gone ‘back to the floor’.

We use a structured approach to staff diversity network groups, recognising the valuable role they play in terms of communicating the views of and engaging with our employees. We have recently conducted a joint review, involving staff network representatives, and moved from having separate diversity strands to create a new corporate Equality Group. The DWP Equality Group exists to champion diversity and equality of opportunity across the Department in relation to both staff and customer issues. The group is supported by an intranet based equality hub involving on-line communities which provides a range of resources about each of the protected characteristics. It also includes a discussion group which is an employee forum for topical debate. Themes emerging from the on-line communities escalated to the Equality Group for further consideration.

The Department runs an employer sponsored volunteering scheme where we offer our employees the opportunity to spend a day working for a local voluntary or community organisation in their area. In 2011 we committed to giving 10,000 volunteering days via our ‘Community 10,000’ scheme.

We also recognise the importance of working alongside and consulting with our Departmental Trade Unions as a method of employee engagement. Approximately two thirds of our employees are currently a member of a union. Representatives from across the Department meet our Trade Unions on a regular basis, at both a national and regional level to discuss and progress relevant issues. For example, we engaged with them about the approach we should take for this report. Our approach to engaging with our service users

We recognise the need to involve customers in diversity issues and to consult them in relation to our proposals for implementing equality legislation and discharging our responsibilities under the Public Sector Equality Duty.

For example, in 2007 the Department established the DWP Customer Equality Reference Group to help us embed a strong customer perspective specifically on diversity issues and to act as a consultative group. It has a membership of 22 external customer representative groups and usually meets twice a year. They provide robust insights by applying their expert knowledge across the breadth of the Department’s policies and services. Representatives offer their views as individuals with personal experience and as representatives of their organisations and communities.

We consulted with the group about our overall approach to the Public Sector Equality Duty. This included getting feedback on the structure and content of this report and also the development of our equality objectives.

On a wider level the Department has a variety of measures in place to engage with our customers and their representative groups. These include traditional formal policy consultation routes but also more informal methods. For example, we publish several newsletters such as the DWP Stakeholder Bulletin which provides a monthly update on what is happening in our Department. Also our ‘e-zine’ Touchbase which provides up-to-date information about benefits, pensions, DWP services and relevant news from other government departments and agencies.

As part of the Department, The Office of Disability Issues (ODI) works closely with the Minister for Disabled People and leads the Government’s vision of achieving equality for disabled people. They consult and engage representative groups such as Equality 2025 which is a group of publicly-appointed disabled people. It offers strategic advice at very early stages of policy development on issues that affect disabled people.

Our approach to paying due regard

The Department pays due regard to the equality duty when we develop, implement and evaluate our policies, services and processes. We are currently working with stakeholders to produce revised guidance and templates about equality analysis to help meet the new duty. We will continue to use our established equality impact assessment process to enable the Department to demonstrate compliance until the new guidance is fully embedded.

Our approach to developing equality objectives

The specific duty requires the Department to set measurable equality objectives by 6 April 2012 and then at intervals of not less than four years from the initial date of publication. Our objectives look at addressing key equality issues for both our customers and employees. They are embedded within our organisational aims and align with our Departmental Business plan and equality information. Our equality objectives will be regularly reviewed and updated.

**Alternative formats**

If you would like a copy of this report in an alternative format, please contact:

Diversity and Equality Directorate, Porterbrook House, 7 Pear Street, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S11 8JF.

Email: Adelphi.diversityandequality@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

**Feedback**

Thank you for taking the time to read this report, we welcome your feedback. Please write to us using the details above.

## Section 1: Information about our policies and services

### Data sources and availability

| Number | Indicator | Data source | Time period and availability | |--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1 | Rates of people moving from out of work benefits into employment | DWP and HMRC administrative data | • New indicator data are not yet available. | | | | | • Progress will be reported on a quarterly basis and will cover Great Britain. Both measures will be available between 18 and 21 months after either a claimant moves from out of work benefits or where someone moves from these benefits into employment. This is partly due to the time it takes to process the management data and also the time periods used to calculate the statistics. | | 2 | Numbers on key out of work benefits | DWP administrative data | • Splits currently available by age and gender, and partly for ethnicity. | | | | | • Latest data available at July 2011 covered November 2010. | | | | | • Produced four times a year covering the months of February, May, August and November. Data are available with six months delay. | | 3 | Proportion of children living in workless households | Household Labour Force Survey | • Splits currently available by age, ethnicity and gender. | | | | | • Latest data available at July 2011 covered Quarter 2 2010. | | | | | • Produced twice a year. Data are available for Quarter 2 and Quarter 4 each year with a delay of around six weeks after the period referred to. | | 4 | Young people not in employment or full time education | Labour Force Survey | • Impact indicator covers age. Splits currently available by disability, ethnicity and gender. | | | | | • Latest data available at July 2011 covered Quarter 1 2011. | | | | | • Produced monthly approximately six weeks after the period referred to. Three months of data are combined for the indicator. | | Number | Indicator | Data source | Time period and availability | |--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 5 | Gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population | Labour Force Survey | • Impact indicator covers disability. Splits currently available by age, ethnicity, gender and religion or belief.\
• Latest data available at July 2011 covered Quarter 1 2011.\
• Produced quarterly approximately six weeks after the period referred to. Three months of data are combined for the indicator.\
• Splits currently available by age, ethnicity, gender and religion or belief.\
• Latest data available at July 2011 covered Quarter 1 2011 for gender and disability, and 4 quarter averages (to increase data reliability for these groups) from Quarter 2 2010 to Quarter 1 2011 for ethnicity and religion or belief.\
• Produced quarterly approximately six weeks after the period referred to.\
• Methodological differences mean only data presented by disability is fully comparable with the headline data. The average age of withdrawal is based on multiplying each age by the probability of exiting the labour market at that age. | | 6 | Average age people stop working | Labour Force Survey | • Indicator covers disability. Splits currently available by age, ethnicity and gender. Information on religion or belief and sexual orientation has been collected from April 2011. Results are expected to be available in Spring/Summer 2013.\
• Latest data available at July 2011 covered 2009/10.\
• Produced once a year covering a financial year, with a delay of just over a year after the end of the period referred to.\
• Data do not include care home residents due to the sample for the survey used consisting of the private household population. | | 7 | Rate of disability poverty | Family Resources Survey | • Splits currently available by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Information on religion or belief and sexual orientation has been collected from April 2011. Results are expected to be available in Spring/Summer 2013.\
• Latest data available at July 2011 covered 2009/10.\
• Produced once a year covering a financial year, with a delay of just over a year after the end of the period referred to.\
• Data do not include care home residents due to the sample for the survey used consisting of the private household population. | | 8 | Rate of pensioner poverty | Family Resources Survey | • Splits currently available by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Information on religion or belief and sexual orientation has been collected from April 2011. Results are expected to be available in Spring/Summer 2013.\
• Latest data available at July 2011 covered 2009/10.\
• Produced once a year covering a financial year, with a delay of just over a year after the end of the period referred to.\
• Data do not include care home residents due to the sample for the survey used consisting of the private household population. | | Number | Indicator | Data source | Time period and availability | |--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 9 | Social mobility in adulthood | To be determined | a year after the end of the period referred to. | | | Number of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer | Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings | • Data do not include care home residents due to the sample for the survey used consisting of the private household population. | | | | | • To be determined. | | | | | • Splits currently available by age and gender. This will be supplemented by data from the Family Resources Survey for religion or belief and sexual orientation which has been collected from April 2011. Results are expected to be available in Spring/Summer 2013. | | | | | • Latest data available at July 2011 covered 2010. | | | | | • Produced once a year covering a financial year, with a delay of just over a year after the start of the period referred to. | | 10 | Monetary value of fraud and error in the benefit system | DWP administrative data | No equality information currently available. We are considering the feasibility of collecting this and will provide an update in the next report. | | | Public opinion of DWP service levels | DWP administrative data | • Splits currently available by age, disability, ethnicity and gender. | | | | | • The latest data available at July 2011 covered 2009 for Jobcentre Plus and 2009/10 for the Pension Service. Produced once a year. | | 11 | Employment gap | Labour Force Survey | Indicator focuses on disabled people, splits are available by age (for young adults and older workers), ethnicity and disability. | | | | | • Data available approximately six weeks after the end of each quarter. | | | | | • Data are seasonally unadjusted so only year on year comparisons can be made. |

Note: Estimates are based on a variety of data and are therefore subject to uncertainty. Small differences should be treated with caution as these will be affected by sampling error and variability in the data source. Employment related impact indicators

1. Rates of people moving from out of work benefits into employment

What does this tell us?

This is a new indicator that combines two aspects:

- the rate of people moving from out of work benefits; and
- the percentage of those that moved from these benefits going into employment.

No data were available at July 2011. We expect data to be available for the rates of people moving from out of work benefits into employment split by age, ethnicity and gender for the next report.

How will an improvement be shown?

This indicator will show an improvement if the time taken to move claimants off benefit and into work reduces, and so directly affects the employment rate. 2. Numbers on key out of work benefits

What does this tell us?

This indicator looks at numbers of people on key out of work benefits:

- Jobseekers Allowance;
- Incapacity Benefits/Employment Support Allowance;
- Lone parents receiving Income Support; and
- Others receiving income related benefits. These are mainly Pension Credit recipients for men aged under state pension age. The remainder are in receipt of Income Support.

How will an improvement be shown?

This indicator will show an improvement if the number of people in receipt of key out of work benefits decreases, reflecting the Department’s economic and social objective of helping more people into employment.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further information about a variety of benefits and customer groups is available on the DWP tabulation tool where user defined tables can be created.

Table 2.1: Number on key out of work benefits by age, Great Britain, thousands, November 2010

| Age | Jobseeker's Allowance (claimant count) (UK seasonally adjusted) | Jobseeker's Allowance (claimant count) (GB not seasonally adjusted) | Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits | Lone Parents on Income Support | Other (Income Support, others and Pension Credit) | |-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Unknown | .. | - | 0.09 | 0.01 | 0.30 | | Under 18 | .. | 4.21 | 4.84 | 5.13 | 12.06 | | 18-24 | .. | 385.73 | 154.94 | 171.89 | 29.38 | | 25-34 | .. | 329.18 | 330.42 | 272.08 | 7.65 | | 35-44 | .. | 285.79 | 561.76 | 160.89 | 6.83 | | 45-49 | .. | 137.57 | 378.50 | 27.94 | 4.10 | | 50-54 | .. | 108.66 | 403.87 | 7.99 | 4.51 | | 55-59 | .. | 84.25 | 454.64 | 2.31 | 5.35 | | 60-64 | .. | 16.21 | 297.36 | 0.07 | 121.87 | Table 2.2: Number on key out of work benefits by ethnicity, Great Britain, thousands, November 2010(^1, 2)

| Ethnicity | Jobseeker’s Allowance (claimant count) (UK seasonally adjusted) (^3) | Jobseeker’s Allowance (claimant count) (GB not seasonally adjusted) (^4) | Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits (^5, 8) | Lone Parents on Income Support (^5) | Other (Income Support, others and Pension Credit) (^6, 7) | |------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|----------------------------------------| | White: British | .. | 1,009.94 | .. | 485.73 | .. | | White: Irish | .. | 8.45 | .. | 3.86 | .. | | White: Other White | .. | 31.96 | .. | 11.08 | .. | | Mixed: White and Black Caribbean | .. | 11.77 | .. | 7.32 | .. | | Mixed: White and Black African | .. | 3.34 | .. | 1.91 | .. | | Mixed: White and Asian | .. | 2.73 | .. | 1.16 | .. | | Mixed: Other Mixed | .. | 6.69 | .. | 3.23 | .. | | Asian or Asian | .. | 21.96 | .. | 4.72 | .. | | British: Indian | .. | 29.10 | .. | 13.76 | .. | | British: Pakistani | .. | 12.76 | .. | 4.81 | .. | | British: Bangladeshi | .. | 10.79 | .. | 3.49 | .. | | British: Other Asian | .. | 39.18 | .. | 17.64 | .. | | Black or Black British: Black Caribbean | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | | Ethnicity | Jobseeker's Allowance (claimant count) (UK seasonally adjusted) | Jobseeker's Allowance (claimant count) (GB not seasonally adjusted) | Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits | Lone Parents on Income Support | Other (Income Support, others and Pension Credit) | |----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Black or Black British: | | | | | | | Black African | .. | 38.48 | .. | 27.61 | .. | | Black or Black British: | .. | 9.53 | .. | 4.55 | .. | | Other Black | | | | | | | Chinese or Other | .. | 2.89 | .. | 1.43 | .. | | Ethnic Group: | | | | | | | Chinese | .. | 23.91 | .. | 11.92 | .. | | Ethnic Group: Other | | | | | | | Prefer not to say | .. | 69.04 | .. | 26.28 | .. | | Missing/old values/no personal contact | .. | 19.14 | .. | 17.78 | .. | Table 2.3: Number on key out of work benefits by gender, Great Britain, thousands, November 2010(^1,2)

| Gender | Jobseeker’s Allowance (claimant count) (UK seasonally adjusted) (^3) | Jobseeker’s Allowance (claimant count) (GB not seasonally adjusted) (^4) | Employment and Support Allowance and Incapacity Benefits (^5,8) | Lone Parents on Income Support (^5) | Other (Income Support others and Pension Credit) (^6,7) | |--------|-------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------| | Male | 1,022.00 | 944.13 | 1,477.41 | 20.80 | 145.53 | | Female | 438.00 | 412.31 | 1,109.02 | 627.50 | 46.51 |

All tables sourced from: DWP administrative data.

Definitions and conventions: "-" Nil or negligible ".." Not available. Caseload figures are rounded to the nearest ten. Some additional disclosure control has also been applied. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

State pension age: The age at which women reach state pension age is gradually increasing from 60 to 65 between April 2010 and April 2016 to November 2018. From December 2018, the state pension age for both men and women will start to increase to reach 66 in October 2020. This will introduce a small increase to the number of working age benefit recipients and a small reduction to the number of pension age recipients. Figures from May 2010 onwards reflect this change.

Notes:

1. This table includes the key out-of-work client group categories, with the exception of carers who are not subject to activation policies in the same way as other groups.
2. This table presents just one Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) series. The United Kingdom (UK) seasonally adjusted series is not broken down by age, but is available by gender. The JSA series presented covers Great Britain (GB) and is not seasonally adjusted. This second series is presented as it allows comparisons with the other key out of work benefits published by DWP which also cover GB and are not seasonally adjusted. This JSA series differs slightly from the JSA numbers presented elsewhere for this indicator as it excludes non-computerised clerical cases (approx 1 percent of cases).
3. UK figures (seasonally adjusted) published by the ONS. This series is the most reliable and up-to-date source for claimant unemployment.
4. GB figures (not seasonally adjusted) published by the ONS. This series is the most reliable and up-to-date source for claimant unemployment.
5. GB figures (not seasonally adjusted). Published by DWP as part of the 100 per cent working age client group analysis. A consistent series for the UK as a whole is not readily available.
6. GB figures (not seasonally adjusted). Published by DWP as part of the 100 per cent working age client group analysis. A consistent series for the UK as a whole is not readily available. This group has been reasonably stable over time.
7. Excludes claimants in receipt of Income Support and Carers Allowance.
8. The "Incapacity Benefits group" includes Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). ESA replaced Incapacity Benefit and Income Support paid on the grounds of incapacity for new claims from 27 October 2008.
9. Proportion of children living in workless households

What does this tell us?

This indicator looks at the proportion of children living in workless households in the UK. A workless household is a household that includes at least one person aged 16 to 64 where no-one aged 16 or over is in employment. This indicator reflects the Department's core aims around employment and preventing worklessness.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, an improvement would be demonstrated by a fall in the indicator. Such a change would imply a rise in the proportion of children living in working household. However other factors, for example, changes in household types over time may also need to be accounted for.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further information can be found on the Office of National Statistics website.

Table 3.1: Percentage of children in each economic activity status of household category by age of child

| Age of child | Combined Working households | Households containing both working and workless members | Workless households | |--------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------| | Under 1 | 55.5 | 28.4 | 16.1 | | 1 | 49.6 | 33.4 | 17.0 | | 2 | 51.3 | 30.8 | 17.9 | | 3 | 51.8 | 30.9 | 17.4 | | 4 | 48.4 | 33.2 | 18.4 | | 5 | 52.6 | 28.7 | 18.7 | | 6 | 53.0 | 30.0 | 17.0 | | 7 | 53.5 | 28.6 | 17.9 | | 8 | 55.4 | 28.2 | 16.4 | | 9 | 53.5 | 31.4 | 15.1 | | 10 | 56.6 | 28.4 | 15.0 | | 11 | 54.0 | 30.6 | 15.4 | | 12 | 51.3 | 33.0 | 15.7 | | 13 | 51.6 | 35.6 | 12.8 | | 14 | 47.1 | 38.5 | 14.4 | | 15 | 50.1 | 36.6 | 13.3 | | All | 52.1 | 31.7 | 16.2 |

### Table 3.2: Percentage of children in each economic activity status of household category by gender of child(^{1,2})

| Gender of child | Combined economic activity status of household | | |-----------------|-----------------------------------------------|---| | | Working households | Households containing both working and workless members | Workless households | | Male | 52.2 | 31.6 | 16.1 | | Female | 52.0 | 31.7 | 16.3 | | All | 52.1 | 31.7 | 16.2 |

### Table 3.3: Percentage of children in each economic activity status of household category by ethnic origin of child(^{1,2})

| Ethnic origin of child | Combined economic activity status of household | | |------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|---| | | Working households | Households containing both working and workless members | Workless households | | White | 56.0 | 28.9 | 15.0 | | Mixed | 26.3 | 58.9 | 14.8 | | Asian or Asian British | 39.8 | 29.9 | 30.3 | | Black or Black British | 26.3 | 58.9 | 14.8 | | Chinese or other ethnic group | 48.1 | 25.4 | 26.5 | | All (^3) | 52.1 | 31.7 | 16.2 |

All tables sourced from: Labour Force Survey household datasets, Quarter 4 2010 (October-December 2010).

Notes:

1. Children refers to children under 16.
2. Households including at least one person aged 16 to 64.
3. Total includes children with unknown ethnic origin.
4. Young people not in employment or full-time education

What does this tell us?

This indicator is measured by dividing the number of 18-24 year olds who are not in either work or full-time education by the total number of 18-24 year olds. This means it is precisely the proportion of 18-24 year olds not in employment or full-time education. The indicator will measure the Department's success in improving the proportion of young people engaged in a positive activity, be it employment, education or training. It recognises the importance of raising participation in education and improving labour market outcomes for young people not in full-time education.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, a decrease in the indicator will demonstrate an improvement in the labour market position of young people. However, economic conditions will also need to be taken into account.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further information about the Department's business plan transparency measures is available online.

Table 4.1: Proportion of young people not in full time education who are workless by disability, UK, Quarter 1 2011 (January 2011-March 2011)(^1,2)

| Disability status | Proportion | |-------------------|------------| | Disabled | 56.8 | | Non-disabled | 26.6 | | All | 30.1 |

Table 4.2: Proportion of young people not in full time education who are workless by ethnicity, UK, quarterly average Quarter 1 2010 to Quarter 4 2010 (January 2010-December 2010)(^1,3)

| Ethnic group of individual | Proportion | |----------------------------|------------| | White | 30.8 | | Mixed | 43.5 | | Asian or Asian British | 48.3 | | Black or Black British | 50.1 | | Chinese or other ethnic group | 53.8 | | All | 32.5 | Table 4.3: Proportion of young people not in full time education who are workless by gender, UK, Quarter 1 2011 (January 2011- March 2011)(^4)

| Gender | Proportion | |--------|------------| | Male | 26.8 | | Female | 33.9 | | All | 30.3 |

All tables sourced from: Labour Force Survey.

Notes:

1. As with the headline impact indicator, this measure uses LFS data. However, unlike the overall measure, these data are seasonally unadjusted and only released quarterly. Therefore it is not fully comparable with the overall measure.
2. Disability includes those who are disabled under the Equality Act definition, those who are work-limiting disabled only, and those who are both. It covers the individual rather than the household.
3. This looks at the average of the four quarters from Quarter 2 2010 to Quarter 1 2011 (April 2010-March 2011) inclusive. Individual quarters are not given due to sample sizes.
4. These data are fully comparable with the headline impact indicator using the ONS seasonally adjusted data.
5. Gap between the employment rates for disabled people and the overall population

What does this tell us?

This indicator is measured by comparing the seasonally unadjusted employment rate for disabled people with the unadjusted working age employment rate for Great Britain. This uses the ONS Headline Rate definition of the employment rate which is between the ages of 16 and 64 for both males and females.

These data allow the Department to monitor progress towards employment equality for disabled people. It allows the public to assess how well the Department is performing against its aim of promoting high levels of employment by helping people move into work.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally a decrease in the indicator will demonstrate that an improvement has been achieved. However, economic conditions will also need to be taken into account, particularly as recent research indicates that employment prospects for disabled people are less sensitive to economic conditions than the overall population.(^1) This may mean that as the economy improves and overall rates increase, the gap between the disabled and the overall employment rates will increase, which would represent a decline in this indicator.

Links to other information that you may find useful

A full description of indicators towards disability equality by 2025 is available on the Independent Living and Office for Disability Issues website.

Table 5.1: Revised gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population by age, GB, Quarter 1 2011 (January 2011-March 2011)(^1,2,3,4)

| Age | Gap (percentage points) | |-------|-------------------------| | 16-17 | 10.8 | | 18-24 | 20.6 | | 25-34 | 24.4 | | 35-44 | 26.4 | | 45-54 | 24.6 | | 55+ | 19.8 |

(^1) An example of this research can be found online. Table 5.2: Gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population by ethnicity, GB, Quarter 1 2010 to Quarter 4 2010 (January 2010-December 2010)(^{1,2,3,4})

| Ethnicity | Gap (percentage points) | |--------------------------------|-------------------------| | White | 25.4 | | Mixed | 11.2 | | Asian or Asian British | 24.0 | | Black or Black British | 17.9 | | Chinese and other ethnic group | 24.0 |

Table 5.3: Gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population by gender, GB, Quarter 1 2011 (January 2011-March 2011)(^{1,2,3,4,5,6})

| Gender | Gap (percentage points) | |--------|-------------------------| | Male | 25.8 | | Female | 20.5 |

Table 5.4: Gap between employment rates for disabled people and the overall population by religion or belief, GB, Quarter 2 2010 to Quarter 1 2011 (April 2010-March 2011)(^{1,2,3,4,7,8})

| Religion | Gap (percentage points) | |-------------------|-------------------------| | Christian | 24.8 | | Buddhist * | * | | Hindu | 22.0 | | Jewish * | * | | Muslim | 20.6 | | Sikh | 26.5 | | Any other religion| 18.9 | | No religion at all| 24.5 |

All tables sourced from: Labour Force Survey.

Notes:

1. Data are rounded to the nearest 0.1 percentage point.
2. Data are subject to sampling variation and is not seasonally adjusted.
3. Data covers GB only, not UK.
4. Accuracy of data are limited by small sample sizes.
5. Ethnicity is self reported.
6. Changes to the collection of data on ethnicity in the LFS. Mean data for 2011 are currently unavailable.
7. Religion or belief is self reported.
8. - denotes sample size is too small to reliably quote.
9. Average age people stop working

What does this tell us?

This indicator is measured using the ‘average age of withdrawal from the labour market’ statistic which has been previously published by the ONS.

This indicator measures the ages at which people withdraw from the labour market and become inactive; data are not seasonally adjusted. Due to the nature of the indicator, year on year changes tend to be small. The focus should not be on the short term changes but the long term trend. Extending working life is an important part of the response to demographic ageing and ensuring pensions sustainability. Monitoring changes in average age of withdrawal will provide an indication of how the Department’s policies are encouraging longer working.

How will an improvement be shown?

An increase in the age of withdrawal from the labour market would constitute a success. There may be a number of contributing factors including: a continuation of long term trends; changing attitudes around working longer; and the effect of state pension age changes.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further information on the labour market and retirement is available in the ONS report on Pension Trends.

Table 6.1: Average age of withdrawal from the labour market by disability and gender, UK, Quarter 1 2011 (January-March 2011)(^{1,2,3})

| Disability status | Men | Women | |-------------------|------|-------| | Disabled | 63.8 | 61.9 | | Non-disabled | 65.5 | 63.4 |

Table 6.2: Average age of withdrawal from the labour market by ethnicity and gender, UK, Quarter 1 2010 to Quarter 4 2010 (January 2010-December 2010)(^{1,2,4,5})

| Ethnic group of individual | Men | Women | |----------------------------|------|-------| | White | 64.7 | 62.6 | | Mixed | 60.2 | 59.2 | | Asian or Asian British | 63.0 | 60.4 | | Black or Black British | 64.0 | 62.6 | | White and Asian | 62.1 | 61.2 | Table 6.3: Average age of withdrawal from the labour market by gender, UK, Quarter 1 2011 (January-March 2011)\\textsuperscript{1,2}

| Age of withdrawal from labour market | Men | Women | |-------------------------------------|-----|-------| | Age | 64.5| 62.8 |

Table 6.4: Average age of withdrawal from the labour market by gender and religion or belief, GB, Quarter 2 2010 to Quarter 1 2011 (April 2010-March 2011)\\textsuperscript{1,2,6,7,8}

| Religion or belief | Men | Women | |-------------------|-----|-------| | Christian | 64.6| 62.5 | | Buddhist | 59.2| 59.9 | | Hindu | 62.1| 60.6 | | Jewish | 64.1| 61.3 | | Muslim | 64.0| 58.1 | | Sikh | 59.8| 59.5 | | Any other religion| 62.7| 60.6 | | No religion | 64.5| 63.1 |

All data sourced from: Labour Force Survey.

Notes:

1. Data are rounded to the nearest 0.1 year.

2. Data are subject to sampling variation and are not seasonally adjusted.

3. Data covers individuals who indicate a current disability under the Equality Act definition (data do not cover past disability).

4. Ethnicity is self reported.

5. Changes to the collection of data on ethnicity in the LFS mean data for 2011 are currently unavailable.

6. Data covers GB only.

7. Religion or belief is self reported.

8. Accuracy of data are limited by small sample sizes. Poverty and social mobility related impact indicators

9. Rate of disability poverty

What does this tell us?

This indicator measures the percentage of individuals in families containing someone who is disabled with incomes below 60 percent of equivalised median income(^2), before housing costs. Tackling disability poverty is a priority as families with a disabled member have a higher rate of low-income poverty than average. Using 60 percent of equivalised median income as a poverty threshold is a historical and international benchmark. These data do not include care home residents due to the sample for the survey used consisting of the private household population. No adjustment is made to disposable household income to take into account any additional costs that may be incurred due to the illness or disability in question, and disability benefits have been included in the equivalised household income used. This means that the position in the income distribution of these groups, as shown here, may have some upward bias. Results based on incomes excluding disability benefits are available on request.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally a decrease in the indicator will demonstrate that an improvement has been achieved. However, economic conditions also need to be taken into account.

Links to other information that you may find useful

For further information, a full description of indicators towards disability equality by 2025 is available on the Independent Living and Office for Disability Issues website. Further analysis of Households Below Average Income (HBAI) data are shown in the annual HBAI publication.

______________________________________________________________________

(^2) In order to allow comparisons of living standards between different household types, income is adjusted to take into account variations in the size and composition of the household in a process known as equivalisation. This adjustment reflects the common sense notion that a household of several people requires a higher income than a single person in order for both households to have an equivalent standard of living.

### Table 7.1: Poverty rate for families by presence of disabled members and age, 2009/10, United Kingdom(^{1,2,3,4})

| Group | Age | Poverty rate (proportion) | |------------------------|--------------|---------------------------| | | Families with a disabled member | Families with no disabled member | | Children | | | | | 0-4 | 25 | 19 | | | 5-10 | 22 | 16 | | | 11-15 | 25 | 19 | | | 16-19 dependent children | 33 | 18 | | Working-age adults | 16-19 adults | 28 | 25 | | | 20-24 | 28 | 17 | | | 25-29 | 25 | 13 | | | 30-34 | 21 | 11 | | | 35-39 | 20 | 13 | | | 40-44 | 23 | 13 | | | 45-49 | 22 | 12 | | | 50-54 | 18 | 12 | | | 55-59 | 23 | 14 | | | 60-64 males | 21 | 17 | | Pensioners | 60-64 females| 15 | 15 | | | 65-69 | 15 | 16 | | | 70-74 | 16 | 21 | | | 75-79 | 20 | 23 | | | 80-84 | 19 | 29 | | | 85+ | 20 | 33 |

### Table 7.2: Poverty rate for families by presence of disabled members, 2009/10, United Kingdom(^{1,2,3,4})

| Poverty rate (proportion) | |---------------------------| | Families with a disabled member | Families with no disabled member | | Poverty rate | 21 | 16 | Table 7.3: Poverty rate for families by presence of disabled members and ethnicity, 2007/08-2009/10, United Kingdom\\textsuperscript{1,2,3,5}

| Ethnic group of head of household (3-year average) | Poverty rate (proportion) | | |---------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|---| | | Families with a disabled member | Families with no disabled member | | White | 22 | 14 | | Mixed | 32 | 20 | | Asian or Asian British | 43 | 31 | | Indian | 29 | 22 | | Pakistani and Bangladeshi | 56 | 46 | | Black or Black British | 32 | 26 | | Black Caribbean | 27 | 23 | | Black Non-Caribbean | 37 | 28 | | Chinese or other ethnic group | 34 | 25 |

Table 7.4: Poverty rate for families by presence of disabled members and gender, 2009/10, United Kingdom

| Gender | Poverty rate (proportion) | | |--------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|---| | | Families with a disabled member | Families with no disabled member | | Male child | 24 | 18 | | Female child | 26 | 19 | | Male working-age adult | 22 | 14 | | Female working-age adult | 21 | 14 | | Male pensioner | 16 | 17 | | Female pensioner | 18 | 22 |

All tables sourced from: Households Below Average Income 2007/8-2009/10.

Notes:

1. This indicator is measured using HBAI statistics sourced from the FRS. The indicator measures the percentage of individuals in families with a disabled member with incomes below 60 percent of contemporary equivalised median income, before housing costs. Data are annual with approximately a 12-month time delay after the end of the survey period.
2. All estimates are based on survey data and are therefore subject to uncertainty. Small differences should be treated with caution as these will be affected by sampling error and variability in non-response.
3. Proportions of individuals in low-income households have been rounded to the nearest percentage point.
4. Results cover the financial year 2009/10.
5. Results cover the financial years 2007/08 to 2009/10.
6. Rate of pensioner poverty

What does this tell us?

The indicator measures the percentage of pensioners in households with incomes below 60 percent of equivalised median income, after housing costs.

Tackling pensioner poverty is a priority for the Department. Strategies used include the ‘triple guarantee’ that pensions are raised by the highest of earnings, prices or 2.5 percent. In addition, protecting key benefits for older people such as keeping the winter fuel payment exactly as budgeted for by the previous Government. Rules and regulations relating to pensions are also being simplified to prevent people from falling into poverty in later life.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, a decrease in this indicator will demonstrate that an improvement has been achieved. However, economic conditions also need to be taken into account.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further analysis of HBAI data are shown in the annual HBAI publication.

Table 8.1: Poverty rate for pensioners by age, UK, 2009/10(^{1,2,3,4})

| Age | Poverty rate (percentage of pensioners in low income households) | |--------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | 60-64 females| 14 | | 65-69 | 14 | | 70-74 | 16 | | 75-79 | 16 | | 80-84 | 17 | | 85+ | 19 |

Table 8.2: Poverty rate for pensioners by disability, UK, 2009/10(^{1,2,3,4,5})

| Disability status | Poverty rate (percentage of pensioners in low income households) | |--------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | Those living in families where no-one is disabled | 17 | | Those living in families where someone is disabled | 15 | Table 8.3: Poverty rate for pensioners by ethnic group of head of household, UK, 2007/08-2009/10(^1,2,3,6,7)

| Ethnic group of head (3-year average) | Poverty rate (percentage of pensioners in low income households) | |--------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | White | 16 | | Mixed | .. | | Asian or Asian British | 33 | | Indian | 29 | | Pakistani and Bangladeshi | 46 | | Black or Black British | 27 | | Black Caribbean | 25 | | Black Non-Caribbean | .. | | Chinese or other ethnic group | 28 |

Table 8.4: Poverty rate for pensioners by gender, UK, 2009/10(^1,2,3,4)

| Gender | Poverty rate (percentage of pensioners in low income households) | |-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------| | Male | 14 | | Female | 16 |

All tables sourced from: Households Below Average Income 2007/8-2009/10.

Notes:

1. This indicator is measured HBAI statistics sourced from the FRS. The indicator measures the percentage of pensioners with incomes below 60 percent of contemporary equivalised median income, after housing costs. Data are annual with approximately a 12-month time delay after the end of the survey period.
2. All estimates are based on survey data and are therefore subject to uncertainty. Small differences should be treated with caution as these will be affected by sampling error and variability in non-response.
3. Proportions of individuals in low-income households have been rounded to the nearest percentage point.
4. Results cover the financial year 2009/10, i.e. April 2009 to March 2010.
5. No adjustment is made to disposable household income to take into account any additional costs that may be incurred due to the illness or disability in question, and disability benefits have been included in the equivalised household income used. This means that the position in the income distribution of these groups, as shown here, may have some upward bias. Results based on incomes excluding disability benefits are available on request.
6. '..' means data are not available due to small sample size.
7. Results cover the financial years 2007/08 to 2009/10.
8. Social mobility in adulthood

What does this tell us?

This indicator is currently in development. The Department is committed to working with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and others to develop new measures of progress in improving social mobility. We are looking at ways of measuring access to the professions, progression in the labour market and the availability of ‘second chances’ to succeed.

No data were available as at July 2011. We expect data to be available for mid to late 2012.

How will an improvement be shown?

As this indicator is still in development, we are unable to explain how an improvement will be shown. Pensions-related impact indicators

10. Number of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer

What does this tell us?

This indicator measures the number of jobs (including those affected by absence) where the individual is aged at least 22, under state pension age and earning above the earnings threshold for automatic enrolment (£7,475 in 2011/12 earnings terms) who are participating in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer. The indicator excludes the self-employed and it should be noted that an individual may have more than one employer.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, an increase in the indicator will demonstrate if an improvement has been achieved.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Further information on this indicator is available online.

Table 10.1: Number of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer by age, 2010, United Kingdom

| Age | Employees (millions) | |---------|----------------------| | 22-24 | 0.3 | | 25-29 | 1.1 | | 30-34 | 1.4 | | 35-39 | 1.6 | | 40-44 | 1.9 | | 45-49 | 2.0 | | 50-54 | 1.6 | | 55-59 | 1.2 | | 60-64 males | 0.4 |

Table 10.2: Number of employees in a pension scheme sponsored by their employer by gender, 2010, United Kingdom

| Gender | Employees (millions) | |--------|----------------------| | Male | 6.0 | | Female | 5.4 | All tables sourced from: DWP analysis of the Office of National Statistics Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE).

Notes:

1. This indicator is measured using the ASHE and includes all employee jobs (including those affected by absence) with an employer sponsored pension where the individual is aged at least 22 and less than state pension age (currently 65 for men and 60 for women) and where annual gross earnings is above the earnings threshold of £7,475 in 2011 earnings terms.

2. All estimates are based on survey data and are therefore subject to uncertainty.

3. Numbers of employee jobs have been rounded to the nearest 0.1million. Totals may not sum due to rounding.

4. '..' means data are not available. Operational working of the Department related impact indicators

5. Monetary value of fraud and error in the benefit system

What does this tell us?

This is the primary Departmental indicator for levels of fraud and error in the benefit system. The Fraud and Error National Statistics published for this indicator include global estimates for fraud and error in the benefit system. In addition there are more detailed estimates for Income Support, Jobseeker’s Allowance, Pension Credit and Housing Benefit, and for types of error. This indicator is important for Departmental assurance on the effect of anti-fraud and error activity across the businesses. No equality information is currently available for this indicator. We are considering the feasibility of publishing any information for this impact indicator and will provide an update in the next report.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, a decrease in the indicator will demonstrate if an improvement has been achieved but economic conditions and overall expenditure will also need to be taken into account.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Reports on the monetary value of fraud and error in the benefits system are available online. 12. Public opinion of DWP service levels

What does this tell us?

We have recently redeveloped this into a new indicator. In the future it will show the satisfaction levels of people who have had meaningful contact with the Department as a whole in the previous six months. There will be a score for overall satisfaction, with sub-indicator scores for satisfaction against four key drivers of customer satisfaction - On Time, Right Treatment, Right Result, and Easy Access.

The indicator demonstrates the Department's service to the public, allowing performance to be reviewed and service improvements to be made accordingly. For the next report, we will include data collected relating to the new indicator.

For this report we have included results from the previous separate Jobcentre Plus and Pension, Disability and Carers Service (PDCS) surveys to give some information on public opinions of DWP Service Levels. The 2009 Jobcentre Plus survey found that 75 per cent of Jobcentre Plus claimants were satisfied overall with the service they received with 12 per cent reporting dissatisfaction. The 2009/2010 PDCS survey found that 92 per cent of customers were satisfied overall with 6 percent reporting dissatisfaction. Because different surveys are used, direct comparisons of the Jobcentre Plus and PDCS data are not valid.

How will an improvement be shown?

Generally, for the new indicator a higher score will indicate greater customer satisfaction. This will be a baseline measure for the Department. Once the baseline is set, good performance can be agreed and reflected in maintaining or improving the level of satisfaction, depending on the amount of change for the Department at the time.

Links to other information that you may find useful

Information on the new impact indicator is available online.

The Jobcentre Plus Customer Survey 2011.

PDCS annual report of quarterly satisfaction 2009-2010.

### Table 12.1: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with JCP by age

| Group | Age | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |------------------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | 16-24 | 79 | 9 | | | 25-34 | 73 | 12 | | | 35-49 | 75 | 12 | | | 50+ | 75 | 12 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 567. JCP Customer Satisfaction Survey.

### Table 12.2: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with PDCS by age

| Group | Age | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |------------------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | 16-24 | 88 | 12 | | | 25-34 | 88 | 12 | | | 35-49 | 83 | 17 | | | 50-64 | 88 | 12 | | Pensioners | 60-65 | 95 | 5 | | | 66-69 | 90 | 10 | | | 70-74 | 93 | 7 | | | 75+ | 94 | 6 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 761. PDCS Annual Report Quarterly Satisfaction Monitor.

### Table 12.3: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with Jobcentre Plus by disability

| Group | Long-standing illness or disability that limited daily activities or work | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | Yes | 74 | 12 | | | No | 77 | 12 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 567. Jobcentre Plus Customer Satisfaction Survey.

### Table 12.4: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with PDCS by disability(^2,3,4)

| Group | Long-standing illness or disability that limited daily activities or work | Customers’ reported satisfaction | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | Yes | 76 | 24 | | | | No | 89 | 11 | | | Pensioners | Yes | 85 | 15 | | | | No | 95 | 5 | |

Sources: DWP Research Report 761. PDCS Annual Report Quarterly Satisfaction Monitor.

### Table 12.5: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with Jobcentre Plus by ethnicity(^1)

| Group | Ethnicity | Customer’s reported satisfaction | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |------------------------|-----------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | White | 75 | 12 | | | | Asian | 83 | 8 | | | | Black | 69 | 16 | | | | Mixed/Other | 73 | 13 | |

Sources: DWP Research Report 567. Jobcentre Plus Customer Satisfaction Survey.

### Table 12.6: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with PDCS by ethnicity(^2,3,4)

| Group | Ethnicity | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |----------------|-----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | White | 86 | 14 | | | Asian | 85 | 15 | | | Black | 94 | 6 | | | Mixed/Other | 86 | 14 | | Pensioners | White | 94 | 6 | | | Asian | 87 | 13 | | | Black | 87 | 13 | | | Mixed/Other | 81 | 19 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 761. PDCS Annual Report Quarterly Satisfaction Monitor.

### Table 12.7: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with Jobcentre Plus by gender(^1)

| Group | Gender | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |----------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | Male | 69 | 16 | | | Female | 80 | 9 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 567. Jobcentre Plus Customer Satisfaction Survey. Table 12.8: Customers’ reported overall satisfaction with PDCS by gender(^2,3,4)

| Group | Gender | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ satisfied | Percentage of customers who are either ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied | |----------------|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Working-age adults | Male (Age 16-64) | 87 | 13 | | | Female (Age 16-59) | 86 | 14 | | Pensioners | Male (Age 65+) | 93 | 7 | | | Female (Age 60+) | 94 | 6 |

Sources: DWP Research Report 761. PDCS Annual Report Quarterly Satisfaction Monitor.

Notes:

1. The 2009 Jobcentre Plus National Customer Satisfaction survey was commissioned to measure overall level of satisfaction and assess differences across different customer groups. 4,125 interviews were completed between July and October 2009 with findings representative of Income Support, Incapacity Benefit and Jobseeker’s Allowance customers. The questionnaire focused on customers who had both claimed/received benefit and had had contact with Jobcentre Plus within the last 12 months.
2. The 2009/2010 PDCS Quarterly Customer Satisfaction Monitor was commissioned to measure overall level of satisfaction and assess differences across different customer groups. 5,941 interviews were completed with findings representative of Attendance Allowance (AA), Carers Allowance (CA), Disability Living Allowance (DLA), Pension Credit and State pension customers. The questionnaire focused on customers who had both claimed/received benefit or had contacted to report a change in circumstances with Pension, Disability and Carers Service in the three months previous to each quarterly survey.
3. PDCS also serves working-age customers, those receiving DLA or CA may also be customers of Jobcentre Plus.
4. DLA and AA customers of the PDCS have a disability in order to meet the qualifying criteria. However, some may choose not to report it on the satisfaction survey.
5. Additional customer data

Employment gap information

What does this tell us?

The employment rate gap compares the overall employment rate for 16 to 64 year olds with the employment rate for 16 to 64 year olds with various protected characteristics, for Great Britain. A positive employment rate gap means that the overall Great Britain employment rate is higher than the employment rate for the group with a particular protected characteristic.

How will an improvement be shown?

A reduction in the employment gap would generally show an improvement. However, economic conditions will also need to be taken into account.

Table 13.1: Percentage point employment gaps for various protected characteristics, Quarter 1 2011(^1,2,3)

| Disadvantaged group | Employment rate gap | |--------------------------------------|---------------------| | Female(^4) | 5.1 | | Disabled people | 25.1 | | Ethnic minorities | 12.8 | | Young people (aged 18 to 24) | 15.8 | | Older workers (aged 50 to 64) | 7.1 |

Source: Labour Force Survey.

Notes:

1. Data are rounded to the nearest 0.1 percentage point.
2. Data are subject to sampling variation and is not seasonally adjusted.
3. Data covers GB only, not UK.
4. Data for the gender employment gap covers the UK and is seasonally adjusted. Links to additional information:

DWP Equality Impact Assessments

National and Official Statistics products - the Department produces a number of National and Official Statistics products.

Employment and Support Allowance - Work Capability Assessment and Sanctions

Income Related Benefits Estimate of Take-Up - includes details on age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Households Below Average Income Series - includes details on age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Low-Income Dynamics - includes details on age and gender.

Pensioner Incomes Series - includes details on age, ethnicity and gender.

Family Resources Survey - includes details on age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Access to Work - includes details about the programme that helps fund reasonable adjustments for disabled workers.

Lone parents on Jobseekers Allowance - includes details on age, gender, disability and ethnicity.

Second tier pension provision - includes details on age and gender.

DWP tabulation tool - includes a range of benefit data with details on age and gender and some splits available by disability and ethnicity.

Life Opportunities Survey - a detailed survey looking at life opportunities for disabled and non-disabled people.

Pre-Work Programme and Get Britain Working Official Statistics - includes details on age, disability and ethnicity:

Independent Living and Office for Disability Issues indicators on disability equality by 2025.

Please email general.statistics@dwp.gsi.gov.uk if you are interested in any of these data sources or want to enquire about the feasibility of any analysis of DWP data by a protected characteristic that is not included here. Section 2: Information about our employees

14. The DWP workforce

As part of our commitment to achieving a workforce representative of the society we serve and providing equality of opportunity, we monitor representation of protected characteristics by grade across the Department.

The Civil Service grading structure indicates level of seniority within the organisation and covers a range of roles:

Senior Civil Service (SCS): Pay Band 3 Director General Pay Bands 2 and 1 Director and Deputy Director

Senior Management: Grade 6/Band G Grade 7/Band F

Managerial: SEO/Band E HEO/Band D EO/Band C

Administrative: AO/Band B AA /Band A

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show the Department’s employees by grade as percentages against each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender. Unfortunately, at this time indication rates in relation to sexual orientation are too low for this information to be included. At 31 March 2011 the indication rate for ethnicity was 76% and 82.5% for disability.

How will an improvement be shown?

A higher percentage under each protected characteristic will show we employ a greater proportion of people with that protected characteristic. We have set representation rate targets for staff at senior grades until 2013 for ethnicity, disability and gender. Progress towards these was previously reported in our Equality Schemes update. Some of these targets have already been met.

### Table 14.1: Percentage of DWP workforce by age(^{1,2,3})

| ONS Age Range | % Band A/AA to Band C/EO | % Band D/HEO and Band E/SEO | % Band F/ Grade 7 | % Band G/ Grade 6 | % SCS all | % Not known | Total % by age | Actual total headcount | |---------------|--------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-----------|-------------|---------------|-----------------------| | 16-24 | 3.3 | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 7.5 | 3.0 | 2.7 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 14.3 | 7.0 | 7,625 | | 30-34 | 9.0 | 6.1 | 10.3 | 4.0 | 1.6 | 23.8 | 8.7 | 9,472 | | 35-39 | 10.9 | 10.1 | 9.5 | 9.5 | 7.8 | 19.0 | 10.8 | 11,803 | | 40-44 | 15.7 | 17.4 | 16.8 | 14.4 | 14.4 | 23.8 | 15.8 | 17,334 | | 45-49 | 18.6 | 25.0 | 21.2 | 23.8 | 30.7 | 14.3 | 19.3 | 21,133 | | 50-54 | 16.4 | 21.4 | 22.6 | 23.0 | 22.6 | 0.0 | 17.1 | 18,670 | | 55-59 | 11.7 | 11.8 | 13.4 | 20.8 | 20.2 | 4.8 | 11.8 | 12,902 | | 60-64 | 5.8 | 4.2 | 3.4 | 3.7 | 2.3 | 0.0 | 5.6 | 6,112 | | 65+ | 1.1 | * | * | * | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.0 | 1,113 |

| % Headcount by grade | 87.9 | 9.8 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 100 | | Actual total headcount | 96,159 | 10,718 | 1,608 | 682 | 257 | 21 | 109,445 |

Notes:

1. Headcount is the number of people employed.
2. Percentages shown are the number of employees [ONS headcount] by age and grade over the total number of employees by grade.
3. Data as at 31 March 2011.

- - Level of data too low for publication Table 14.2: Percentage of DWP workforce by grade and indicated disability\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Disability | Grade | % Band A/AA to Band C/EO | % Band D/HEO and Band E/SEO | % Band F/ Grade 7 | % Band G/ Grade 6 | % SCS all | % Not known | Total % by disability | Actual total headcount indicated | |------------------|-------|--------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-----------|-------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------| | 2013 Target | | | | | | | | | | | Disabled | 6.0 | 5.5 | 5.2 | 5.2 | 5.2 | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | | Non-disabled | 6.6 | 5.9 | 4.5 | 4.5 | 5.8 | 0.0 | 6.5 | 5,856 | | | Actual total headcount indicated | 93.4 | 94.1 | 95.5 | 95.5 | 94.2 | 100.0 | 93.5 | 84,419 | | | | 77,979 | 10,027 | 1,431 | 627 | 208 | * | 100 | 90,275 | |

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees [ONS Headcount] who have chosen to indicate their disability and grade over the total number of employees by grade.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011.
3. Headcount indicated is the number of employees who have indicated their disability status.

- - Level of data too low for publication Table 14.3: Percentage of DWP workforce by grade and indicated ethnicity\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Ethnicity | % Band A/AA to Band C/EO | % Band D/HEO and Band E/SEO | % Band F/ Grade 7 | % Band G/ Grade 6 | % SCS all | % Not known | Total % by ethnicity | Actual total headcount indicated | |--------------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-----------|-------------|----------------------|----------------------------------| | 2013 Target Ethnic minority | N/A | 7.5 | 5.5 | 5.5 | 5.0 | N/A | N/A | N/A | | White | 12.0 | 7.0 | 4.9 | 4.1 | 2.5 | 11.1 | 11.3 | 9,369 | | Actual total headcount indicated | 88.0 | 93.0 | 95.1 | 95.9 | 97.5 | 88.9 | 88.7 | 73,783 | | | 72,266 | 8,895 | 1,239 | 542 | 201 | * | 100 | 83,152 |

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees [ONS Headcount] who have chosen to indicate their ethnicity and grade over the total number of employees by grade.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011
3. Headcount indicated is the number of employees who have indicated their ethnicity status.

- - Level of data too low for publication Table 14.4: Percentage of DWP workforce by gender\\textsuperscript{1,2}

| Gender | % Band A/AA to Band C/EO | % Band D/HEO and Band E/SEO | % Band F/ Grade 7 | % Band G/ Grade 6 | % SCS all | % Not known | Total % by gender | Actual total headcount | |--------|--------------------------|-----------------------------|-------------------|------------------|----------|-------------|------------------|-----------------------| | 2013 | | | | | | | | | | Target | N/A | N/A | 47.0 | 45.0 | 39.5 | N/A | N/A | N/A | | Female | 68.8 | 60.8 | 49.4 | 44.3 | 38.9 | 61.9 | 67.5 | 73,836 | | Male | 31.2 | 39.2 | 50.6 | 55.7 | 61.1 | 38.1 | 32.5 | 35,609 | | Actual total headcount | 96,159 | 10,718 | 1,608 | 682 | 257 | 21 | 100 | 109,445 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees [ONS Headcount] by gender and grade over the total number of employees by grade.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011.
3. Disciplinary procedures

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show the proportion of employees who have been subject to formal disciplinary procedures against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Table 15.1: Percentage of employees disciplined by age(^{1,2})

| Age | Total % | Total overall headcount | |---------|---------|-------------------------| | 16-24 | 5.1 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 3.5 | 7,625 | | 30-34 | 2.8 | 9,472 | | 35-39 | 2.4 | 11,803 | | 40-44 | 1.8 | 17,334 | | 45-49 | 1.7 | 21,133 | | 50-54 | 1.6 | 18,670 | | 55-59 | 2.1 | 12,902 | | 60-64 | 2.0 | 6,112 | | 65+ | 1.7 | 1,113 | | (blank) | 0.0 | * | | Overall total | 2.2 | 109,445 |

Table 15.2: Percentage of employees disciplined by indicated disability(^{1,2})

| Disability | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |------------|---------|-----------------------------------| | Disabled | 2.5 | 5,856 | | Non-disabled | 1.9 | 84,419 | | Total indicated | 1.9 | 90,275 |

Table 15.3: Percentage of employees disciplined by indicated ethnicity(^{1,2})

| Ethnicity | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |---------------|---------|-----------------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 2.7 | 9,369 | | White | 1.9 | 73,783 | | Total indicated | 2.0 | 83,152 | Table 15.4: Percentage of employees disciplined by gender\\textsuperscript{1,2}

| Gender | Total % | Total overall headcount | |--------|---------|-------------------------| | Female | 1.7 | 73,836 | | Male | 3.1 | 35,609 | | Total | 2.2 | 109,445 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management.

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees disciplined in the period over the total number of employees who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011.

- - Level of data too low for publication

16. Exits

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show the reasons why employees leave the Department against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Table 16.1: Percentage of reason for leaving by age

| Age | % Death in service | % Dismissal | % Early retirement | % Early severance | % Other | % Resignation | % Transfer | % of total leavers | Actual leavers | |-------|--------------------|-------------|--------------------|-------------------|--------|---------------|------------|-------------------|----------------| | 16-24 | * | 9.2 | 0.0 | * | 18.5 | 22.4 | 8.4 | 18.0 | 2,149 | | 25-29 | * | 11.6 | 0.0 | 5.4 | 12.1 | 19.2 | 23.1 | 15.0 | 1,791 | | 30-34 | * | 12.9 | * | 7.1 | 7.7 | 11.6 | 17.6 | 10.1 | 1,207 | | 35-39 | * | 12.3 | * | 14.9 | 6.5 | 11.2 | 15.0 | 9.5 | 1,127 | | 40-44 | 9.2 | 13.7 | * | 20.3 | 6.3 | 10.3 | 10.5 | 9.2 | 1,097 | | 45-49 | 11.5 | 13.2 | * | 23.7 | 7.4 | 9.5 | 12.1 | 9.4 | 1,115 | | 50-54 | 22.1 | 10.9 | 33.8 | 6.6 | 8.8 | 7.3 | 8.9 | 8.9 | 1,065 | | 55-59 | 29.8 | 11.2 | 58.2 | 5.0 | 9.6 | 5.5 | 4.5 | 8.8 | 1,054 | | 60-64 | 11.5 | 4.2 | * | 10.8 | 17.2 | 2.5 | 0.0 | 8.4 | 1,005 | | 65+ | * | * | * | * | 5.8 | * | 0.0 | 2.6 | 311 | | (blank)| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | | Total % leavers by reason | 1.1 | 10.9 | 1.8 | 2.0 | 37.9 | 43.1 | 3.2 | 100 | | Actual total leavers | 131 | 1,298 | 213 | 241 | 4,514 | 5,143 | 381 | 11,921 | Table 16.2: Percentage of reason for leaving by indicated disability\\textsuperscript{1,2,3,4,5,6,7}

| Disability | % Death in service | % Dismissal | % Early retirement | % Early severance | % Other | % Resignation | % Transfer | % of total leavers | |------------|--------------------|-------------|--------------------|-------------------|--------|--------------|------------|-------------------| | Disabled | 14.8 | 11.8 | 9.7 | 7.6 | 11.3 | 5.6 | 7.9 | 9.3 | | Non-disabled | 85.2 | 88.2 | 90.3 | 92.4 | 88.7 | 94.4 | 92.1 | 90.7 | | Actual leavers indicated | 108 | 821 | 207 | 224 | 1754 | 1533 | 152 | |

Table 16.3: Percentage of reason for leaving by indicated ethnicity\\textsuperscript{1,2,3,4,5,6,7}

| Ethnicity | % Death in service | % Dismissal | % Early retirement | % Early severance | % Other | % Resignation | % Transfer | % of total leavers | |-----------------|--------------------|-------------|--------------------|-------------------|--------|--------------|------------|-------------------| | Ethnic minority | 11.9 | 17.3 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 12.1 | 11.4 | 11.9 | 12.0 | | White | 88.1 | 82.7 | 96.5 | 96.4 | 87.9 | 88.6 | 88.1 | 88.0 | | Actual leavers indicated | 101 | 802 | 171 | 196 | 1997 | 1944 | 159 | |

Table 16.4: Percentage of reason for leaving by gender\\textsuperscript{1,2,3,4,5,6,7}

| Gender | % Death in service | % Dismissal | % Early retirement | % Early severance | % Other | % Resignation | % Transfer | % of total leavers | |--------|--------------------|-------------|--------------------|-------------------|--------|--------------|------------|-------------------| | Female | 59.5 | 58.9 | 54.5 | 64.3 | 57.6 | 63.0 | 50.4 | 59.9 | | Male | 40.5 | 41.1 | 45.5 | 35.7 | 42.4 | 37.0 | 49.6 | 40.1 | | Actual leavers | 131 | 1298 | 213 | 241 | 4514 | 5143 | 381 | |

All data sourced from: Resource Management. Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of leavers who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic and reason for leaving over the total number of employees by reason for leaving.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011.
3. Dismissal – Dismissal and discharged probation.
4. Transfer – Transfer to other Government department, transfer of function.
5. Early retirement – approved early retirement, voluntary early release – early retirement.
6. Early severance – voluntary early release – early severance.
7. Other – retirement at/above minimum age, ill health retirement, end of temporary contract, blank reason for leaving.

- - Level of data too low for publication

17. Working Patterns

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show the proportion of employees with a part-time working pattern against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender. These data show part-time working rates as at 31 March 2011.

Table 17.1: Percentage of employees working part-time by age

| Age | % Part-time | Total overall headcount | |---------|-------------|-------------------------| | 16-24 | 12.7 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 19.5 | 7,625 | | 30-34 | 32.8 | 9,472 | | 35-39 | 41.3 | 11,803 | | 40-44 | 42.4 | 17,334 | | 45-49 | 37.5 | 21,133 | | 50-54 | 32.3 | 18,670 | | 55-59 | 29.4 | 12,902 | | 60-64 | 57.2 | 6,112 | | 65+ | 67.1 | 1,113 | | (blank) | 0.0 | * | | Total | 36 | 109,445 |

Table 17.2: Percentage of employees working part-time by indicated disability

| Disability | % Part-time | Total overall headcount indicated | |------------|-------------|----------------------------------| | Disabled | 37.9 | 5,856 | | Non-disabled | 39.8 | 84,419 | | Total indicated | 39.7 | 90,275 |

Table 17.3: Percentage of employees with a part time working pattern by indicated ethnicity

| Ethnicity | % Part-time | Total overall headcount indicated | |-----------------|-------------|----------------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 35.2 | 9,369 | | White | 39.1 | 73,783 | | Total indicated | 38.7 | 83,152 | Table 17.4: Percentage of employees with a part-time working pattern by gender

| Gender | % Part-time | Total overall headcount | |--------|-------------|-------------------------| | Female | 47.3 | 73,836 | | Male | 12.1 | 35,609 | | Total | 36.0 | 109,445 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees working part-time over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic.

- - Level of data too low for publication

18. Grievances

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show the proportion of employees who have raised a grievance against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Table 18.1: Percentage of employees raising a grievance by age(^{1,2})

| Age | Total % | Total overall headcount | |---------|---------|-------------------------| | 16-24 | 1.2 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 1.1 | 7,625 | | 30-34 | 1.0 | 9,472 | | 35-39 | 1.1 | 11,803 | | 40-44 | 1.0 | 17,334 | | 45-49 | 0.9 | 21,133 | | 50-54 | 0.7 | 18,670 | | 55-59 | 0.8 | 12,902 | | 60-64 | 0.7 | 6,112 | | 65+ | 0.4 | * | | (blank) | 0.0 | * | | Total | 0.9 | 109,445 |

Table 18.2: Percentage of employees raising a grievance by indicated disability(^{1,2})

| Disability | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |------------|---------|----------------------------------| | Disabled | 1.5 | 5,856 | | Non-disabled | 0.9 | 84,419 | | Total indicated | 0.9 | 90,275 |

Table 18.3: Percentage of employees raising a grievance by indicated ethnicity(^{1,2})

| Ethnicity | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |-----------------|---------|----------------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 1.1 | 9,369 | | White | 0.8 | 73,783 | | Total indicated | 0.9 | 83,152 | Table 18.4: Percentage of employees raising a grievance by gender\\textsuperscript{1,2}

| Gender | Total % | Total overall headcount | |--------|---------|-------------------------| | Female | 0.9 | 73,836 | | Male | 0.9 | 35,609 | | Total | 0.9 | 109,445 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management.

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees raising a grievance in the period over the total number of employees that have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic.
2. Data as at 31 March 2011.

- - Level of data too low for publication

19. Performance markings

What does this tell us?

The current performance management marking system was introduced in 2008/2009. Employees are marked as 'wholly exceptional', 'consistently good' or 'unsatisfactory'. Where employees were given a marking other than one of these three it is shown as 'other marking'.

The data presented here show the proportion of employees awarded each performance marking against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender.

Where some employees have not been given a performance marking, the total percentage for that group will not be 100 percent. Table 19.1 Percentage of employees with each performance marking by age

| Age | % Wholly exceptional | % Consistently good | % Unsatisfactory | % Other marking | Total % with markings | Total overall headcount (excl. SCS) | |-------|----------------------|---------------------|------------------|-----------------|-----------------------|-------------------------------------| | 16-24 | 2.3 | 78.4 | * | 0.7 | 81.5 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 3.1 | 80.4 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 85.1 | 7,624 | | 30-34 | 3.0 | 85.3 | * | 3.0 | 91.3 | 9,468 | | 35-39 | 3.2 | 88.2 | 0.2 | 2.7 | 94.2 | 11,783 | | 40-44 | 3.3 | 89.7 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 94.5 | 17,297 | | 45-49 | 3.0 | 90.6 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 94.2 | 21,054 | | 50-54 | 2.2 | 91.7 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 94.4 | 18,612 | | 55-59 | 1.8 | 91.6 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 93.9 | 12,850 | | 60-64 | 0.7 | 92.6 | * | 0.2 | 93.6 | 6,106 | | 65+ | * | 92.0 | * | * | 93.2 | 1,113 | | (blank)| 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | * | | Total | 2.6 | 89.1 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 92.9 | 109,188 |

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees (excluding SCS) with a performance marking for the period over the total number of employees (excluding SCS) by age.
2. Performance ratings for 2010/11 reporting year.
3. Table reflects employees with a marking entered on Resource Management.

- - Level of data too low for publication Table 19.2: Percentage of employees with each performance marking by indicated disability\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Disability | % Wholly exceptional | % Consistently good | % Unsatisfactory | % Other marking | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated (excl. SCS) | |--------------|----------------------|---------------------|------------------|-----------------|---------|---------------------------------------------| | Disabled | 1.7 | 93.1 | * | 1.0 | 95.9 | 5,844 | | Non-disabled | 2.9 | 92.6 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 96.9 | 84,223 | | Total indicated | 2.8 | 92.6 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 96.8 | 90,067 |

Table 19.3: Percentage of employees with each performance marking by indicated ethnicity\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Ethnicity | % Wholly exceptional | % Consistently good | % Unsatisfactory | % Other marking | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated (excl. SCS) | |-----------------|----------------------|---------------------|------------------|-----------------|---------|---------------------------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 2.1 | 91.4 | 0.2 | 2.6 | 96.2 | 9,364 | | White | 2.8 | 91.6 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 95.5 | 73,587 | | Total indicated | 2.7 | 91.6 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 95.6 | 82,951 |

Table 19.4: Percentage of employees with each performance rating by gender\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Gender | % Wholly exceptional | % Consistently good | % Unsatisfactory | % Other marking | Total % | Total overall headcount (excl. SCS) | |--------|----------------------|---------------------|------------------|-----------------|---------|-----------------------------------| | Female | 2.7 | 89.7 | 0.1 | 1.5 | 94.0 | 73,736 | | Male | 2.4 | 87.9 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 90.7 | 35,452 | | Total | 2.6 | 89.1 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 92.9 | 109,188 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees (excluding SCS) with a performance marking for the period over the total number of employees (excluding SCS) who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic.
2. Performance Ratings for 2010/11 reporting year.
3. Table reflects employees with a marking entered on Resource Management.
4. Promotion

What does this tell us?

The data presented here show employees promoted against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender. These data are for the twelve month period between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011.

Table 20.1: Percentage of employees promoted by age(^{1,2})

| Age | Total % | Total overall headcount | |---------|---------|-------------------------| | 16-24 | 0.7 | 3,280 | | 25-29 | 0.8 | 7,625 | | 30-34 | 0.6 | 9,472 | | 35-39 | 0.5 | 11,803 | | 40-44 | 0.4 | 17,334 | | 45-49 | 0.3 | 21,133 | | 50-54 | 0.3 | 18,670 | | 55-59 | 0.1 | 12,902 | | 60-64 | * | 6,112 | | 65+ | 0.0 | 1,113 | | (blank) | 0.0 | * | | Total | 0.4 | 109,445 |

Table 20.2: Percentage of employees promoted by indicated disability(^{1,2})

| Disability | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |------------|---------|----------------------------------| | Disabled | 0.3 | 5,856 | | Non-disabled | 0.4 | 84,419 | | Total indicated | 0.4 | 90,275 |

Table 20.3: Percentage of employees promoted by indicated ethnicity(^{1,2})

| Ethnicity | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |---------------|---------|----------------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 0.3 | 9,369 | | White | 0.4 | 73,783 | | Total indicated | 0.4 | 83,152 |

Table 20.4: Percentage of employees promoted by gender(^{1,2})

| Gender | Total % | Total overall headcount indicated | |--------|---------|----------------------------------| | Female | 0.3 | 73,836 | | Male | 0.5 | 35,609 | | Total | 0.4 | 109,445 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management.

Notes:

1. Percentages shown are the number of employees promoted over the total number of who have chosen to indicate that protected characteristic.
2. - - Level of data too low for publication
3. Recruitment Process

What does this tell us?

These data presented here show applicants and those successful at each stage of the recruitment process against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender. These data are for the twelve month period between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011.

Table 21.1: Percentage of successful applicants at different stages of the recruitment process by age

| Age | % Applications | % Success at application | % Success at testing | % Success at final stage | |---------|----------------|--------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------| | Under 25| 26 | 27 | 30 | 33 | | 25-54 | 69 | 69 | 65 | 64 | | Over 55 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 3 |

Table 21.2: Percentage of successful applicants at different stages of the recruitment process by indicated disability

| Disability | % Applications | % Success at application | % Success at testing | % Success at final stage | |------------|----------------|--------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------| | Disabled | 6 | 6 | 13 | 10 | | Non-disabled| 94 | 94 | 87 | 90 |

Table 21.3: Percentage of successful applicants at different stages of the recruitment process by indicated ethnicity

| Ethnicity | % Applications | % Success at application | % Success at testing | % Success at final stage | |---------------|----------------|--------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------| | Ethnic minority| 43 | 44 | 33 | 29 | | White | 57 | 56 | 67 | 71 |

Table 21.4: Percentage of successful applicants at different stages of the recruitment process by gender

| Gender | % Applications | % Success at application | % Success at testing | % Success at final stage | |--------|----------------|--------------------------|----------------------|-------------------------| | Female | 51 | 51 | 47 | 50 | | Male | 49 | 49 | 53 | 50 |

All data sourced from: Internal Management Systems. 22. Pay Gap

The Department analyses data to identify any differences in pay on the grounds of gender, race, age and disability.

The pay gap is calculated by adding together the pay of all of the members of the potentially disadvantaged group in the Department who are in grades below the Senior Civil Service (SCS) and then working out an average salary. This is then compared to the average salary of the potentially advantaged group. The gap is the difference between the two averages divided by the average pay of the advantaged group.

[ \\text{Pay gap} = \\frac{\\text{Pay difference}}{\\text{Pay of the advantaged group}} ]

Therefore, in the case of the gender pay gap, the average salary of women in grades below SCS is calculated and then compared to the average salary of men in grades below SCS. The difference is expressed as a percentage and is presented by grade.

What does this tell us?

The table below shows which group is considered to be advantaged or disadvantaged for the purposes of expressing the pay gap for that protected characteristic. In the case of age, the majority age group (25-54) is shown against both the younger group (16-24) and the older age group (55 and above).

| Protected characteristic | Disadvantaged group | Advantaged group | |--------------------------|---------------------|------------------| | Age | 16-24 | 25-54 | | | 55 and above | 25-54 | | Disability | Disabled | Non-disabled | | Ethnicity | Ethnic minority | White | | Gender | Female | Male |

How will an improvement be shown?

Where the potentially disadvantaged group, for example women, have a higher average salary than their male counterparts, it is expressed as a negative percentage (for example -0.5 percent). This analysis informs the Equal Pay Audit, which takes place on a three yearly basis to identify areas for action.

[\\text{Pay difference} = \\text{mean pay of the advantaged group} - \\text{mean pay of the disadvantaged group}] Table 22.1: Pay gap by age\\textsuperscript{1,2,3}

| Age | Band A/AA | Band B/AO | Band C/EO | Band D/HEO | Band E/SEO | Band F/Grade 7 | Band G/Grade 6 | All grades | |----------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|------------|----------------|----------------|------------| | Age 16-24 (mean salary) | £14,193 | £16,064 | £21,169 | £25,714 | N/A | N/A | N/A | £16,697 | | Age 25-54 (mean salary) | £14,632 | £17,253 | £23,093 | £28,059 | £34,028 | £47,191 | £59,539 | £21,163 | | Pay gap (percent 16-24 to 25-54) | 3.0 | 6.9 | 8.3 | 8.4 | N/A | N/A | N/A | 21.1 |

| Age | Band A/AA | Band B/AO | Band C/EO | Band D/HEO | Band E/SEO | Band F/Grade 7 | Band G/Grade 6 | All grades | |----------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|------------|----------------|----------------|------------| | Age 55 and above (mean salary) | £14,700 | £17,465 | £23,666 | £29,291 | £35,742 | £50,058 | £61,990 | £21,518 | | Age 25-54 (mean salary) | £14,632 | £17,253 | £23,093 | £28,059 | £34,028 | £47,191 | £59,539 | £21,163 | | Pay gap (percent 55+ to 25-54) | -0.5 | -1.2 | -2.5 | -4.4 | -5.0 | -6.1 | -4.1 | -1.7 |

### Table 22.2: Pay gap by indicated disability(^{1,2,3,4})

| Disability | Band A/AA | Band B/AO | Band C/EO | Band D/HEO | Band E/SEO | Band F/Grade 7 | Band G/Grade 6 | All grades | |-----------------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|------------|----------------|----------------|------------| | Disabled (mean salary) | £14,753 | £17,678 | £23,634 | £28,686 | £34,626 | £47,769 | £60,196 | £21,844 | | Non-disabled (mean salary) | £14,715 | £17,579 | £23,390 | £28,317 | £34,342 | £47,756 | £60,285 | £21,741 | | Pay gap (percent disabled to non-disabled) | -0.3 | -0.6 | -1.0 | -1.3 | -0.8 | 0.0 | 0.1 | -0.5 |

### Table 22.3: Pay gap by indicated ethnicity(^{1,2,3,4,5})

| Ethnicity | Band A/AA | Band B/AO | Band C/EO | Band D/HEO | Band E/SEO | Band F/Grade 7 | Band G/Grade 6 | All grades | |-----------------------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|------------|----------------|----------------|------------| | Ethnic minority (mean salary) | £14,677 | £17,427 | £23,076 | £28,070 | £34,113 | £47,229 | £60,876 | £20,486 | | White (mean salary) | £14,692 | £17,471 | £23,378 | £28,348 | £34,383 | £47,746 | £60,423 | £21,665 | | Pay gap (percent ethnic minority to white) | 0.1 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.1 | -0.7 | 5.4 |

### Table 22.4: Pay gap by gender

| Gender | Band A/AA | Band B/AO | Band C/EO | Band D/HEO | Band E/SEO | Band F/Grade 7 | Band G/Grade 6 | All grades | |-----------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|------------|----------------|----------------|------------| | Female (mean salary) | £14,645 | £17,339 | £23,242 | £28,250 | £34,193 | £47,291 | £59,564 | £20,895 | | Male (mean salary) | £14,611 | £16,975 | £23,042 | £28,279 | £34,579 | £48,231 | £60,792 | £21,514 | | Pay gap (percent female to male) | -0.2 | -2.1 | -0.9 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 2.9 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management.

Notes:

1. Salary totals are total full-time salaries in the pay band, excluding allowances and overtime. However, to prevent skews in diversity analyses due to different pay zones, all salaries here are treated as though they are on DWP National pay scales. That is, salaries on pay scales for inner London, outer London and special location pay zones have been placed on their equivalent position on the National pay scale. ERNIC and employer’s superannuation (Civil Service Pension) contributions are excluded from these figures.
2. Mean salary is the total full-time basic salaries for the pay band, divided into the headcount.
3. Records excluded from this analysis include SCS employees and specialists (accountants, lawyers etc) whose salaries are on separate pay scales. Casual and fixed-term appointments are included. The population used in the analysis therefore represents 98.1 percent of the 109,445 DWP employees paid and in post on 31 March 2011.
4. In defining working patterns, all part-year appointments have been categorised as part-time, whether or not part-year attendance is full-time or part-time.
5. Mean salaries only take into account those who have indicated their disability status.
6. Mean salaries only take into account those who have indicated their ethnicity status.
7. Training Data

What does this tell us? These data show applications made and training received by employees against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability, ethnicity and gender. These data are for the twelve month period between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011.

Table 23.1: Percentage of training applications made and training received by age

| Age | % Training applications | % Training received | |-------|-------------------------|---------------------| | 16-24 | 3.0 | 3.4 | | 25-29 | 7.1 | 7.4 | | 30-34 | 8.3 | 8.5 | | 35-39 | 10.7 | 10.7 | | 40-44 | 15.5 | 15.4 | | 45-49 | 20.6 | 20.4 | | 50-54 | 17.4 | 17.0 | | 55-59 | 11.6 | 11.1 | | 60-64 | 5.0 | 5.0 | | 65+ | 0.9 | 1.0 |

Table 23.2: Percentage of training applications made and training received by indicated disability

| Disability | % Training applications | % Training received | |------------|-------------------------|---------------------| | Disabled | 6.7 | 6.7 | | Non-disabled | 93.4 | 93.3 |

Table 23.3: Percentage of training applications made and training received by indicated ethnicity

| Ethnicity | % Training applications | % Training received | |---------------|-------------------------|---------------------| | Ethnic minority | 26.5 | 27.2 | | White | 73.6 | 72.8 |

Table 23.4: Percentage of training applications made and training received by gender

| Gender | % Training applications | % Training received | |--------|-------------------------|---------------------| | Female | 69.6 | 69.0 | | Male | 30.4 | 30.9 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management. 24. Maternity Data

What does this tell us? These data shows the number of employees returning from maternity leave against their status in relation to each of the following protected characteristics: age, disability and ethnicity. These data are for the twelve month period between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011.

Table 24.1: Percentage of employees returning from maternity leave in period by age(^{1,2})

| Age | % Total returning | Actual headcount | |---------|-------------------|------------------| | 16-24 | 3.5 | 58 | | 25-29 | 19.1 | 321 | | 30-34 | 35.9 | 604 | | 35-39 | 26.8 | 451 | | 40-44 | 12.6 | 212 | | 45-49 | 2.1 | 35 | | 50-54 | 0.0 | 0 | | 55-59 | 0.0 | 0 | | 60-64 | 0.0 | 0 | | 65+ | 0.0 | 0 | | (blank) | 0.0 | 0 | | Total | 100 | 1681 |

Table 24.2: Percentage of employees returning from maternity leave in period by indicated disability(^{1,2})

| Disability | % Total returning | Actual headcount indicated | |------------|-------------------|---------------------------| | Disabled | 5.1 | 22 | | Non-disabled | 94.9 | 409 | | Total indicated | 100 | 431 |

Table 24.3: Percentage of employees returning from maternity leave in period by indicated ethnicity(^{1,2})

| Ethnicity | % Total returning | Actual headcount indicated | |-----------------|-------------------|---------------------------| | Ethnic minority | 16.6 | 204 | | White | 83.4 | 1024 | | Total indicated | 100 | 1228 |

All data sourced from: Resource Management

Notes:

1. Data as at 31 March 2011.
2. Percentages shown are the number of employees returning from maternity leave in the period by indicated protected characteristic over the total number of employees returning from maternity leave.
3. Links to additional information

2011 People Survey Results - includes details of the DWP People Survey which is part of the Civil Service People Survey. It contains 57 questions to help determine employee engagement throughout the Civil Service.

2012 Star Performer Network - recognition is due to the work, dedication and commitment of SONG (the DWP national sexual orientation staff network group). This is the first time DWP and SONG have received this recognition.

Top 100 Employer - DWP is one of Britain's Top 100 Employers for lesbian, gay and bisexual staff.

Performance Related Pay - includes details of non-consolidated performance-related pay by DWP, our agencies and executive Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPBs) for the performance year 2010-11.

Workforce Management Returns - includes details of the DWP workforce, our agencies and executive NDPBs.

Business Plan Quarterly Data Summary provide a quarterly snapshot on how each department is spending its budget, the results it has achieved and how it is deploying its workforce.

Equality Impact Assessments help us to make sure the needs of people are taken into account when we develop and implement a new policy or service or when we make a change to a current policy or service. DWP Equality Information 2011 Report under the Public Sector Equality Duty

Under the Public Sector Equality Duty, part of the Equality Act 2010, as a public body the Department for Work and Pensions has a specific duty to publish relevant proportionate information to demonstrate our compliance. Information showing that we have paid due regard to the aims of the Equality Duty is contained in this report.

Diversity and Equality Directorate Porterbrook House, 7 Pear Street, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S11 8JF.

Contact Information: Adelphi.diversityandequality@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

978-1-84947-998-1 (revised) Published by the Department for Work and Pensions 31 January 2012 www.dwp.gov.uk